Public Address - Hard News (Home)

Exceeding well over? | Mar 07, 2005 11:01

If the Herald on Sunday can't find a better lead story than yesterday's, it should … try harder. Under the heading '$50,000 a day: the princely sum you're paying for Charles' NZ visit', the paper declared that New Zealanders were "forking out $50,000 a day for the privilege of hosting Prince Charles - despite his personal wealth exceeding well over $1 billion."

It continued with the expected elements of a desperate beat-up - a rent-a-quote from Deborah Coddington, and a list of how many hip operations (why is it always hip operations?) or teacher salaries $50,000 would buy. Curiously enough, by the time the story appeared on the Herald website yesterday lunchtime, it had been "updated" - that is, considerably toned down.

So why do we pay for Charles' visit? Because until such time as other constitutional arrangements are made, he is our head of state in waiting. Our laws are crafted in his mother's name. And, frankly, it's not a bad deal. We keep a household for the Crown's local agent, but apart from that all the pomp is paid for by someone else - except when, once in a blue moon, he pays a visit.

At which time he becomes our guest, even if he has effectively invited himself. And not just any guest, but one with a genuine need for security protection. (In Australia, the taxpayer coughed up $1 million for a seven-day tour, so we seem to be getting away quite cheaply.) Just what sort of pissant little country would we be if we seriously demanded that he go Dutch, so to speak, for the privilege of being walked around some representative delights? Of course we wouldn't, which is what made the story so silly.

On the other hand - and I really must stop aligning myself with a man who has a haircut like a 1970s bus driver - I liked John Roughan's column in the Weekend Herald. Much as I would expect to see us make the break and become a republic eventually, I agree with Roughan that Charles "would make a pretty decent King," and, like him, I don't really understand the enmity the man attracts.

Having been making use of Wellington Internet cafes last week, I was interested in Nicky Hager's story on the potential hazards of doing your Internet banking in public. But what really amazed me is that Hager's hacker was able to waltz into a net café and install a key-logger, presumably without permission. Any competent operator should not allow his customers to install shit on a public computer. They should be wholly locked down.

But such is the monstrous insecurity of the Windows platform that account holders are equally, if not more, at risk at home. A survey last year found that more than two million Americans had had money stolen from their accounts in the past 12 months, adding up to a total loss of more than $2 billion. Phishing scams still seem to be a bigger problem than local password capture, but it may be that a more robust "two factor" model will become more common.

But it won't be free: the ASB/Bank Direct Netcode system, introduced three months ago, is recommended only for transactions over $2500 and the user pays 25 cents a pop to receive a text message containing a short-lived security key. Citibank's new "virtual keyboard", which replaces keystrokes with mouse clicks - seems a simpler solution.

Oh, and if you thought using an ATM was inherently safe, the redoubtable Ross Anderson of Cambridge University has some news for you.

Anyway, I'm back from what turned out to be a rather tiring trip to Wellington - and I have a card that identifies me as a "Fringe artist", which I quite like the sound of. I picked up the new Metro magazine to read the "alternative radio" feature story on the flight home. It's largely accurate, although the part about digital radio is gibberish (and the slogan was "Other radio stations are shit" and not "All other stations are shit"). I do think the is-bFM-getting-too-professional-and-thus-losing-its credibility angle is getting tired (there goes that same disaffected DJ) but it's nice to see the point made about the creative policy. The day that b lets agencies devise its advertising is really the day that it's over.

But I was surprised to discover that the most interesting thing in the magazine was sometime national candidate Allan Peachey's thoughtful extract from his new book, on the topic of NCEA. I had Peachey pegged as a windbag - and he's still a bit pompous - but it is a relief to read a considered assessment of how and why the new system came to be (it goes all the way back to Lockwood Smith's tenure as education minister), what went wrong and why it's still a better option than norm-referencing.

Also, Ruth Laugesen in the SST provided a welcome backgrounder to the current tertiary funding controversy:

Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics executive director

Jim Doyle remembers warning incoming Labour MPs in 1999 what they would face when they took office.

"I said: 'You do realise the tertiary sector has gone feral. I don't know how you will get them back in the cage.' It's much easier to open the gate and let the animals out, than 10 years, 15 years later, trying to get them back in."

The rules of the jungle were unveiled by Labour in 1989, when tertiary institutions stopped being funded regardless, and started being funded on the basis of how many students they attracted. The EFTS - or equivalent fulltime students - funding system came in with student fees and student loans.

It heralded a transformation of tertiary education from something reserved for a small elite to something accessible to the masses. People who had never dreamed of going on to higher learning found it was easier than ever before to get into the hallowed halls.

Participation in tertiary education shot up through the '90s, as tertiary institutions were rewarded for getting bums on seats, and as funding was spread thinly but widely, including to private training institutions.

National ministers basked in figures that showed soaring numbers in higher education, although a few people started to worry about why we were turning out so many accountants and business graduates, and so few plumbers.

Eager to encourage even more consumer choice for students, National made a watershed decision in its last days in office. Until then, there had been a cap on student growth of 5% a year at each institution, with ministers sitting around a table each year to decide who would get extra funding for new courses or new students.

That restraint was dropped in a 1998 decision by education minister Wyatt Creech, taking effect from 1999. There was to be "no limit on subsidised student numbers", and no attempt to try to "bias students' decisions towards one type of course or institution over another".

The customer would be king, and the government would pick up the tab. The results were startling.

"All of a sudden, there were potentially four million equivalent fulltime students out there," says Doyle. "You had the combination of a highly competitive environment, and then a massive opportunity all of a sudden that was presented."

It's all very well for David Farrar to declare education to be in a melt-down and crisis, but he really should acknowledge the background here.

But I was alarmed to see Metro declare bowling clubs to be "Not Hot" ("That little joke is over folks"), what with us having an event at the Grey Lynn Bowling Club, 112 Surrey Crescent, Grey Lynn, Auckland, this coming Sunday. Great Blend 2, with the kind assistance of Karajoz Coffee Company, kicks off at 4pm, and the programme will feature an introductory speech from moi, David Slack talking about and reading a little from his next book, a media panel discussion featuring John Campbell, Gemma Gracewood, Noelle McCarthy and Damian Christie, and a performance from The Checks. It's free and there are still a few RSVP places available. Click here to invite yourself.

PS: Thanks to those of you who pointed out the typo in the Keith Sinclair Great New Zealand Argument that had Maori male suffrage in 1967 rather than 1867, but the proofreading prize goes to Brent Jackson of Salient, who kindly advised me of six other minor errors. Much appreciated.

Digg this Scoopit!

The gnarlier questions | Mar 02, 2005 11:52

The select committee recommendations on the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill ought to mollify the concerns of most critics - and if it doesn't, it would be fair to wonder what their motives are in the first place. Clear daylight has been established between the rights and obligations attached on one hand to marriage and civil unions, and on the other to de facto relationships. The language used to refer to civil unions is now to be clearly distinct from that referring to marriage.

Also, the gnarlier questions on treatment of de facto relationships will be referred to the Law Commission before the final bill is drafted. The full report is here as a PDF and Tim Barnett summarises it in detail here.

Unsurprisingly, Stephen Franks summoned his usual mighty wind in response, issuing a lengthy checklist whose effect, oddly, would be to considerably expand the scope of the bill. Among other things, he demands that the section of the Human Rights Act offering protection against discrimination on grounds of marital status be repealed. Like I said: motives.

Meanwhile, extreme civil unions opponent Garnet Milne dishes up a long and crazed comment on Georgina Beyer's bid for human rights protection for transsexuals and its links to "UN-sanctioned paganism". Here's the background on the psychologist he quotes.

A fine post on Dog Biting Men addresses Muriel Newman's campaign against political correctness - and in the process, conclusively nails the playdough issue. Recommended reading.

New Zealand's performance on child poverty has improved slightly but remains lamentable, although Unicef has accepted the government's claims that its new family support package will reduce child poverty by 70% by 2007. You can argue - and plenty of people will - that what these studies measure is actually income inequality, but what happened in this country after the 1991 benefit cuts remains a blight.

Should you be looking for more on the Michael Jackson case, The Smoking Gun offers exhaustive and well-written coverage. But pace yourself: this thing is going to run for six months …

The US State Department's annual report finds torture, rape and illegal detentions carried out under the interim Iraqi government. Bugger.

A story in Britain's Sunday Herald revealing that a 2001 report claiming that the use of depleted uranium in munitions posed a serious long-term health risk was withheld from publication by the World Health Organisation raises a horrifying prospect for the future of Iraq. Although the author claims the WHO was pressured to suppress the report, the organisation says it was simply rejected by an expert panel. This may well be true - there is substantial disagreement on the DU issue - but the fact that any expert opinion holds that the use of such weapons could cause generational health problems should be cause for concern. This blog presses the case, with many links.

And, finally, yes, it is safe to go back to the Grey Lynn Bowling Club. Thanks to the kind support of our sponsors, Karajoz Coffee Company, we're having another event: Public Address Great Blend 2, Sunday March 13, 4pm, Grey Lynn Bowling Club, 112 Surrey Crescent, Grey Lynn, Auckland.

The event will feature a discussion panel comprised of TV3's John Campbell, Frontseat producer Gemma Gracewood, 95bFM news director Noelle McCarthy and our own Damian Christie; plus a performance from The Checks. As usual, it's free, and you can RSVP by clicking here. I very much look forward to seeing you.

PS: No post from me tomorrow - I'm in Wellington making radio and gatecrashing parties - but there will be another excellent instalment in the Great New Zealand Argument series for your edification and enjoyment. Do pop in.

Digg this Scoopit!

All souls | Mar 01, 2005 10:56

Jordan Carter took the trouble to retype the results of the BRC political poll highlighted on page, er, five of the Sunday Star Times. Why did he retype? Because he's on an Xtra connection and can't reach Stuff any more. Mummy, why are these people allowed to break my Internet? And could somebody smack them?

The poll's lack of prominence suggests that Labour-in-the-lead (by 11 points) isn't really news. It will be interesting to see whether a disparity remains between the reliably Labour-friendly polls in the SST and NBR and the high-profile One News Colmar Bunton poll, which recently had the gap closing to five points. National will be hoping the BRC poll is an anomaly, because in several ways it's an absolute shocker.

Frankly, if National (and Act for that matter) can't make hay while the government is as exposed as it's been since 1999 - why wait until Ken Shirley nails the case to do something about Te Wananga o Aotearoa and the further reaches of the tertiary sector if problems were apparent last year? - then things are not looking good.

Sure, the tertiary industry bunfight was launched under National, the Shipley government committed a string of cock-ups and NZQA was a bizarre place in 1999, but that was then, this is now. (nb: the Herald stories I linked to there are all wrongly dated as 2000 rather than 1999) A flexible and responsive tertiary sector is all very well, but the system should have been cleaned up after last year's Christchurch Polytechnic rort became evident. If nothing else, the current climate will allow an injection of sense without the danger of being accused of interfering with the market or something …

There's also a lively debate in progress related to Jordan's comment on the EPMU's call for a 5% wage rise.

There were a couple of reader responses to yesterday's observations on sunny Nelson. Rodger Donaldson reckoned "eat in Blenheim, culture in Nelson":

Seriously. I go through the area once a year, typically, and while Nelson has the better of places to go and things to see, the food is, as you say, expensive and inferior, and the accommodation ridiculous. Nelson is, I think, lazy because it's the default destination in the area.

Blenheim, on the other hand, feels like it's making a bit more of an effort when it comes to accommodation, and the food is fantastic (Bellafico, for example).

Lucy Richardson, however, is loving it:

You missed the best bar in Nelson. opened recently from some out of towners with vision. I've just moved to sunny Nelson from Auckland and I have to say there is nothing, not even love, that would take me back to that souless city.

Nelson's cultural heart is a mix of 80-20 provincial New Zealanders (yes they do exist in a majority outside of Ponsonby) and people like me who have moved here for the lifestyle. Like all places it has its good and down side but I still get to go to arthouse movies, see the likes of Fat Freddy's, go walking on the beach every day, swim in the pool at rush-hour and there's only 20 people in there, walk to work, tramp on the weekends. I live 2km from the beach, 500m from my favourite cafe and 15 minutes from the river. IT'S PURE LIFESTYLE, that's Nelson's charm. And yeah the pay is crap. The compromise one makes.

Ah, the rivers. Last time I was down with the family, our friends Pete and Jo took us to the most wonderful secret swimming hole. There's nothing better. But Auckland is soulless? Nah …

Speaking of souls …

The excellent One Good Move blog has commentary on and a clip from an interesting discussion of religious tolerance - or, rather, the tolerance of faith - on Bill Maher's Real Time.

Republican Newt Gingrich muses about ending university tenure and replacing it with a law "that says, proof that you're anti-American is grounds for dismissal."

An ageing religious leader strikes out against Western democracy, pluralism and human rights. The Pope, I believe he's called.

And Paul Myers of Pharyngula blog (an actual scientist) has been having a high old time making fun of conservative flagship Power Line's professed disbelief in "Darwinism". See: They aren't just petty and mean, they're stupid, and Myers' subsequent response to Power Line's hilariously precious reply, in which he detects "the usual whimper of fragile right-wing egos demanding that they be treated better than they treat others, while still insisting on holding the line on the rank foolishness of the original post." Heh.

In light of Power Line's recent whingeing about getting rude emails from liberals, it's interesting to note that the scientist copped two obscene phone calls, an attempted denial of service attack and a flood of abusive email after his original post.

PS: Daniel Hodson notes that someone has been trying to sell the seabed and foreshore on TradeMe. Although I must say that even for such a lovely property, $900 trillion seems a bit steep …

Digg this Scoopit!